In a child support proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Queens County (Lubow, J.), dated August 12, 2011, which denied his objections to two orders of the same court (Blaustein, S.M.), both dated March 3, 2011, which, upon his failure to appear for a scheduled court date, respectively, (1) inter alia, in effect, granted the mother's petition for enforcement of an order of the same court dated February 3, 2003, directing the entry of a money judgment in the mother's favor against the father, and calculated the sum of child support arrears to be $66, 132.33 as of February 28, 2011, and (2) dismissed, without prejudice, his petition for modification of the order dated February 3, 2003.

ORDERED that the order dated August 12, 2011, is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The Family Court properly denied the father's objections to the Support Magistrate's orders dated March 3, 2011, entered upon the father's failure to appear for a scheduled court date. The proper procedure to challenge an order entered upon default is to move to vacate the default and, if necessary, to appeal from the denial of that motion (see CPLR 5015[a][1]; Matter of Garland v Garland, 28 A.D.3d 481). Here, the father failed to move pursuant to CPLR 5015(a)(1) to vacate his default in appearing for a ...

Our website includes the first part of the main text of the court's opinion.
To read the entire case, you must purchase the decision for download. With purchase,
you also receive any available docket numbers, case citations or footnotes, dissents
and concurrences that accompany the decision.
Docket numbers and/or citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a
legal proceeding. Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision. If the document contains a simple affirmation or denial without discussion,
there may not be additional text.

Buy This Entire Record For
$7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.